ArticlePloS one2014
Methods to assess the impact of mass oral cholera vaccination campaigns under real field conditions.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pre-vaccination biomarkers of enteric dysfunction, inflammation and nutritional status associate with seroconversion to oral cholera vaccine and are perturbed during natural infection.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Direct and indirect effects of 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine on pneumococcal carriage in children hospitalised with pneumonia from formal and informal settlements in Mongolia: an observational study.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2021Article
- Observational
- Evaluating the costs of cholera illness and cost-effectiveness of a single dose oral vaccination campaign in Lusaka, Zambia.PloS one · 2019Article
- Oral cholera vaccines and their impact on the global burden of disease.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2019Review
- Observational
- Effectiveness of reactive oral cholera vaccination in rural Haiti: a case-control study and bias-indicator analysis.The Lancet. Global health · 2015Article
- N-glycosylation of cholera toxin B subunit in Nicotiana benthamiana: impacts on host stress response, production yield and vaccine potential.Scientific reports · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is increasing interest to use oral cholera vaccination as an additional strategy to water and sanitation interventions against endemic and epidemic cholera. There are two internationally-available and WHO-prequalified oral cholera vaccines: an inactivated vaccine containing killed whole-cells of V. cholerae O1 with recombinant cholera toxin B-subunit (WC/rBS) and a bivalent inactivated vaccine containing killed whole cells of V. cholerae O1 and V. cholerae O139 (BivWC). The efficacy, effectiveness, direct and indirect (herd) protection conferred by WC/rBS and BivWC are well established. Yet governments may need local evidence of vaccine impact to justify and scale-up mass oral cholera vaccination campaigns. We discuss various approaches to assess oral cholera vaccine protection, which may be useful to policymakers and public health workers considering deployment and evaluation of the vaccine.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.